When I first started climbing harder grades I was all for the lead but every move I seemed to do was small and extremely static for fear of peeling off and in turn innificient with many more lock offs and clipping high bolts from way down. Eventually I began to try a couple of routes on TR, after I had sent the route in order to clean it. I found many better ways to do moves and forced myself to use those moves on lead making myself more confident and more efficient on rock. As for those who say it is bad to lead like you are on TR, I say it is simply bad to flail on rock, and I am happy moving at about 20 moves per minute during actual climbing time (excluding route finding and rests).

I started TRing and moved on to leading from there. Which do i prefer Leading but both are great in their own way. Running with a group sometimes you have to do some TRing to warm up or so the less mature climbers can get theirs too ya know. So bottom line No its not stupid.

Ok, what do you all think? I have watched myself and others climb things on TR. I notice two things:

a) top-roping makes us do moves in ways which would never work on lead. IE laybacking super thin tips cracks-- you would never do this cos you could never place proper gear.

b) top roping makes us stop thinking about moves and risk and makes us climb inefficiently.

Many climbers make these same claims, but for me, if anything, it has always been the other way around: on toprope I find it easier to stay focused on the climbing; after all, what else is there to focus on? And if I'm more focused on the climbing, I'm more likely to be more focused on climbing more efficiently; after all, what else about climbing is there to focus on?

You claim that TRing you do moves that you wouldn't do on lead. Your example (the layback moves) notwithstanding, are you sure that you're not climbing too cautiously on lead. Maybe on TR you are willing to do thinner, dicier, or more dynamic moves; whereas, on lead, you look for less risky ways to climb the same section of the route. Perhaps you even mistakenly believe the latter to the be the more efficient approach of the two. Usually, it isn't. One of the big breakthroughs in my climbing came when I realized that the riskier, more more dynamic climbing I would do while TRing actually was the more efficient way to climb, and I started to strive to to climb the same way on lead.

I completely agree with you, and that was my first thought. The other weekend I lead a 5.9 slab route (dont hate, still learning), this route was about 120 feet up where as there were only 4 bolts and it was waaaay run out. I lead it first and I was kinda sketched out but eventually finished it. The second time I TRed' it and for about half the climb I simply crawled up it with a flat hand and no looking at foot placement, which I certainly wouldnt have done on lead possibly pending a 20-30 foot grinding slab fall. So I definitely agree with you, when I TR I get more dialed in, rather than on a lead I try and avoid brazen stuff and take my time.

When I first started climbing harder grades I was all for the lead but every move I seemed to do was small and extremely static for fear of peeling off and in turn innificient with many more lock offs and clipping high bolts from way down. Eventually I began to try a couple of routes on TR, after I had sent the route in order to clean it. I found many better ways to do moves and forced myself to use those moves on lead making myself more confident and more efficient on rock. As for those who say it is bad to lead like you are on TR, I say it is simply bad to flail on rock, and I am happy moving at about 20 moves per minute during actual climbing time (excluding route finding and rests).

Those are my sentiments as well. The fear of screwing up a Lead, to me, outweighs the fear of screwing up a TR(not just because of the danger factor). You can TR a route that you have lead and find out beta that you didnt know before, hence making your lead climbing more efficient. Now Im at the stage where I can lead some good stuff, but if I top rope it later, then lead again, the lead becomes more comfortable. Not just the fact I have more experience on that specific climb, but also I feel more comfortable doing the specific moves on lead as I did on TR. I hope this makes sense to someone other than me LOL. If you are at a point where you can make questionable moves on lead, or do the same moves you would on TR while leading, then you are at another level past what Im describing.

I was responding to the poster above who said that leading makes a man. Clearly, and luckily, leading doesn't make a man. This is what my 'vast' experience tells me.

As far as whether toproping is stupid, I don't think so. There are many ways one can enjoy and gain positive experiences from climbing. I personally would never suggest one is stupid while another isn't. But I also wouldn't be bothered if someone else expressed their opinion.

Is this informative enough for a post in the Rock Warrior's forum? Was it more informative than suggesting that leading makes a man? If I have failed in the informative-only-test, please forward the posting criteria to me and I will adhere to these policies in the future.

edit: My "thank god" comment was not intended to be an insult to being a man. It only represented that I would be a really creepy man, breasts and all.

edit2: I didn't respond to one of your questions. Do I toprope? Heck yeah I toprope sometimes. In fact, the most pleasing climbing I've ever done was a multipitch climb in which I followed every single pitch. Read about it here: http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=255575&msg=255575#msg255575. I also followed every single pitch when we climbed at Whitesides (more cool photos here: http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=313825&msg=314098#msg314098). I also top roped a lot after I broke my arm. Like I mentioned above, I feel there is nothing wrong with toproping for myself. But I don't speak for everyone and I certainly don't wish to set criteria for anyone but myself.

Leading is by far the best. More engaging and commiting. If the gear is good I will go for it on lead, or if it is of a grade I can manage sketchy pro on the OS. If I am working some 5.13 X I am going to TR hands down, I will fall off, and I don't like dying.

I think toproping can be really useful for leading, not just figuring out beta, but for helping you to feel more confidant- I have HUGE fear problems with leading and if I can successfully toprope a route, I'm more likely to be able to lead it successfully because my brain knows it's possible and that I've done it before. Also, if I'm having a really bad lead day, I can toprope something really hard and then not feel like such a lame-o anymore.

When reading this post I was surprised to see the number of people down playing the importance of TR ing routes. I for one think that for crack climbing it is an important tool in the learning process. My first trip to Indian Creek really would have been a lot less enjoyable and less conducive to learning if not for toproping. Ring locks, cupped hands, off fists, stacking (etc) are techniques that feel so unnatural at first for most climbers that learning on top rope is nearly the only way to get a feel for crack areas like indian creek where technique is so important. Also, at the end of a day of climbing, why not take another run on TR to get your forearms burning one last time? It will only lead to more strength in the long run.

Also, at the end of a day of climbing, why not take another run on TR to get your forearms burning one last time? It will only lead to more strength in the long run.

Because it is a more efficient use of your time to do it on lead. It's not like you're not going to get the same burn doing it on lead, and you will only help yourself to better acclimate to being on the sharp while pumped. Getting pumped on top-rope does very little to help your mental game when you're pumped on lead.

So Spikeddem, if you led a route, lowered, and had a chance to climb it again on TR before you pulled the rope you wouldn't take that opportunity? Now imagine you're at indian creek and this climb happens to be a perfect 140 foot splitter. I don't see why you wouldn't, especially if it was a very high quality climb that would improve your strength and technique. I agree that TR differs from leading in many ways but climbing is climbing. Having a strong body is equally important in climbing as a strong mind and TRing routes will do that.

So Spikeddem, if you led a route, lowered, and had a chance to climb it again on TR before you pulled the rope you wouldn't take that opportunity? Now imagine you're at indian creek and this climb happens to be a perfect 140 foot splitter. I don't see why you wouldn't, especially if it was a very high quality climb that would improve your strength and technique. I agree that TR differs from leading in many ways but climbing is climbing. Having a strong body is equally important in climbing as a strong mind and TRing routes will do that.

It depends on what my goals are. Considering that this is being discussed in the Mental Training forum, I'd imagine that working on the mental game is the goal. That being the case, one should lead it, and not top-rope it.

Moreover, you seem to imply that one can practice technique more readily on top-rope, that is just flat wrong. Sure, it may be the case if you have issues with your lead head, but that is only providing more reason to lead your climbs rather than TR them.

I'm not sure I could disagree much more with the part that I bolded. Your statement claims that climbing is 50% physical and 50% mental (unless you want to add in luck or some other factor, but the physical and mental factors would still be equal in %). I'm afraid you won't find many people here that agree with your statement.

Fact of the matter is you have offered no reason for top-roping the climb instead of leading it. Every single "advantage" you listed is present just as much in lead climbing as it is in TRing. Thus, like I said earlier, your time is better spent leading--assuming the goals align with what I stated earlier.

The rock warrior's way stresses how climbing, unlike most sports, is equally divided in the need for strength, technique, and mental abilities. Anyway, I don't want to bicker anymore on this forum. I can see that we won't agree. Thanks for you views.

The rock warrior's way stresses how climbing, unlike most sports, is equally divided in the need for strength, technique, and mental abilities. Anyway, I don't want to bicker anymore on this forum. I can see that we won't agree. Thanks for you views.

Strength as important as technique? In any case, I'm not sure if you were thinking that I was saying that the mental game is a smaller portion than physical conditionining--if so, that's not how I meant to come off. I meant to suggest that the mental aspect is much greater.

The rock warrior's way stresses how climbing, unlike most sports, is equally divided in the need for strength, technique, and mental abilities. Anyway, I don't want to bicker anymore on this forum. I can see that we won't agree. Thanks for you views.

Strength as important as technique? In any case, I'm not sure if you were thinking that I was saying that the mental game is a smaller portion than physical conditionining--if so, that's not how I meant to come off. I meant to suggest that the mental aspect is much greater.

Yes. We've all seen the gym noob burl his way up that 5.10 climb but have you ever seen a 5.7 climber technique his way up a 5.10? I think not. We all forget the importance of strength because most of us start out with more strength than technique and so only train technique. The further and further you go in climbing the more pronounced the need for both strength and technique.

That said in regard to the original question. I climb exactly the same whether I'm bouldering, TRing or on the sharp end. jt512 is correct, if you're climbing differently when on TR than on lead then you may not be climbing at your most efficient.

Me personally I hate leading. Perhaps it's because I'm the rope gun for everyone else. So when a good TR comes along I'm all over it.

Ok, what do you all think? I have watched myself and others climb things on TR. I notice two things:

a) top-roping makes us do moves in ways which would never work on lead. IE laybacking super thin tips cracks-- you would never do this cos you could never place proper gear.

b) top roping makes us stop thinking about moves and risk and makes us climb inefficiently.

I made this resolution some years ago-- if a route takes gear, I will only lead it. I will not top-rope. I woudl rather risk falls on trad gear than top-rope, because I find that it is only leading which focusses and clearsw my head an dmakes me really step into it.

Obviosuly I have not climbed grit death routes where there is zero room for errror! It's not like I'm a hardman or anything, but I was wondering, what do you think for telling beginners? We always say "oh top-ropes tons of stuff!" I say, bag that-- soon as you can, start on the sharp end.

Jay pretty much got my exact thoughts, but i feel like adding some more anyway.

Most people will not admit they hate falling or have other fears in leading that hinder their focus > performance. I admit that i do not trust my partners and my lead climbing ability is suffering for it on bigger routes. In my mind, the higher i go the more severe the consequence is if they fuck it up and fail to stop a fall. As a result if you were to watch me lead a 10m 7c i am at the top efficiently moving with no hesitation to use big dynamics. I just do not register the consequence of a fall at this height. Watch me on a 25M 6c and within 5M of the top you would instantly see how static i become, resulting in fatigue and backing down. I have took many practice falls around this height to try and overcome my fear. But the problem is that they expect the fall, my fear is that when they don't expect it they fail to react in the right way and rope burn.. fast decent.. another dead/crippled climber. The fact is, until i have the guts to face this head on and take falls at such heights when they are not expecting it.. i will not be able to climb those high routes at the grade i know I'm able to do.

I know what my problem is and I'm really forcing myself to over come it. Some people may not be able to do that just yet and TR is 1 option for them to slowly build up the guts to try.

I do kind of agree with you in some ways though. If lead climbing was the only thing you could do.. people would be forced into facing their fears much earlier. On the other hand allot of people would simply say FUCK THAT.. and not climb at all. You just cant underestImate the role TR plays in opening up the climbing world to more people, who very well go on to leading.

I got a question. Say I lead a two pitch sport route, my partner is going to follow on both pitches, I get to the top of pitch one and set anachor for myself, and begin to belay my partner, pulling in the slack as he climbs. Isn't he on a top rope? Does this make him less then me?

I got a question. Say I lead a two pitch sport route, my partner is going to follow on both pitches, I get to the top of pitch one and set anachor for myself, and begin to belay my partner, pulling in the slack as he climbs. Isn't he on a top rope? Does this make him less then me?

Your partner is not top roping he is cleaning. It is likely he will also have to find efficient positions to clean from. In top rope their is nothing to really consider other than the next few moves.

The main differences is that a fall for him runs less risk of injury than a fall for you, the mental aspects of that are heavier on you. Another difference is that he gets to watch you climb first, so he may get sneak peaks of the best or worst way to climb the moves he was able to see you do.

If they are not on sights and you both know the routes well, then the difference will be almost fully mental. You may ofc use a little extra energy to pull the rope before clipping, but that's barely worth mentioning unless their is super drag.